Rapid diagnosis of Entamoeba infection by using Entamoeba and Entamoeba histolytica stool antigen detection kits.

Humans are infected by two morphologically identical species of Entamoeba: Entamoeba histolytica causes amebic colitis and liver abscess, and Entamoeba dispar is noninvasive. Several weeks of culture and isoenzyme (zymodeme) analysis are required to differentiate E. histolytica from E. dispar. Here we report a field trial of commercial antigen detection kits designed to rapidly detect and differentiate E. histolytica from E. dispar in stool specimens. Stool specimens from 202 patients with diarrhea were examined for E. histolytica and E. dispar by microscopy, culture, and antigen detection. Compared with culture, microscopic identification of the E. histolytica-E. dispar complex was 60% sensitive and 79% specific, while the screening antigen detection test for the E. histolytica-E. dispar complex was 80% sensitive and 99% specific. Differentiation of E. dispar from E. histolytica by the E. histolytica-specific test was 95% sensitive and 93% specific compared with zymodeme analysis. We conclude that the antigen detection test for the E. histolytica-E. dispar complex is more sensitive and specific than microscopy and that the E. histolytica-specific antigen detection test is as reliable and much more rapid than zymodeme analysis for the differentiation of E. histolytica from E. dispar.     

Evaluation of the Triage Micro Parasite Panel for detection of Giardia lamblia, Entamoeba histolytica/Entamoeba dispar, and Cryptosporidium parvum in patient stool specimens

A study comparing the Triage Micro Parasite Panel (Biosite Diagnostics, Inc., San Diego, Calif.) to conventional O&P examination (O&P) was performed using patient fecal specimens. Five hundred twenty-three stool samples were compared. Nineteen specimens were found to be positive by Triage, and 29 were found to be positive by O&P. Seven specimens were positive for Giardia lamblia, four were positive for Entamoeba histolytica/E. dispar, and three were positive for Cryptosporidium parvum as determined by both methods. There was one false positive by Triage (C. parvum) and four false negatives by O&P (two G. lamblia, one E. histolytica/E. dispar, and one C. parvum). The Triage test accurately detected all 18 specimens that contained one of the three organisms that it was designed to detect. The Triage test is a rapid, easy-to-use enzyme immunoassay for the detection of G. lamblia, E. histolytica/E. dispar, and C. parvum in fresh or fresh-frozen fecal specimens. These data suggest that the Triage test can be used as a screen for the immediate testing of stool specimens for these three pathogenic parasites. If Triage test results are negative, O&P can be performed if parasitic infections other than G. lamblia, E. histolytica/E. dispar, or C. parvum are suspected.     

Detection of Giardia lamblia, Entamoeba histolytica/Entamoeba dispar, and Cryptosporidium parvum antigens in human fecal specimens using the triage parasite panel enzyme immunoassay

The Triage parasite panel (BIOSITE Diagnostics, San Diego, Calif.) is a new qualitative enzyme immunoassay (EIA) panel for the detection of Giardia lamblia, Entamoeba histolytica/E. dispar, and Cryptosporidium parvum in fresh or fresh, frozen, unfixed human fecal specimens. By using specific antibodies, antigens specific for these organisms are captured and immobilized on a membrane. Panel performance was evaluated with known positive and negative stool specimens (a total of 444 specimens) that were tested by the standard ova and parasite (O&P) examination as the "gold standard," including staining with both trichrome and modified acid-fast stains. Specimens with discrepant results between the reference and Triage methods were retested by a different method, either EIA or immunofluorescence. A number of samples with discrepant results with the Triage device were confirmed to be true positives. After resolution of discrepant results, the number of positive specimens and the sensitivity and specificity results were as follows: for G. lamblia, 170, 95.9%, and 97.4%, respectively; for E. histolytica/E. dispar, 99, 96.0%, and 99.1%, respectively; and for C. parvum, 60, 98.3%, and 99.7%, respectively. There was no cross-reactivity with other parasites found in stool specimens, including eight different protozoa (128 challenges) and three different helminths (83 challenges). The ability to perform the complete O&P examination should remain an option for those patients with negative parasite panel results but who are still symptomatic.     

Diagnosis of invasive amebiasis by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay of saliva to detect amebic lectin antigen and anti-lectin immunoglobulin G antibodies

Saliva from subjects with amebic liver abscess (ALA), acute amebic colitis, asymptomatic infection with Entamoeba histolytica or Entamoeba dispar, and uninfected controls was tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the presence of E. histolytica galactose-inhibitable lectin antigen and salivary immunoglobulin (IgG) antibodies to a recombinant cysteine-rich lectin-derived protein (LC3). Salivary lectin antigen was found in 65.8% of subjects with acute colitis, compared to 22.2% of those convalescent from ALA, 10.0% with asymptomatic E. histolytica infection, 9.8% with E. dispar infection, and 2.6% of controls (subjects from the United States and study patients with nonamebic diarrhea) (P < 0.001 for each compared to values for subjects with colitis). Salivary anti-LC3 IgG antibodies were found in 92% of ALA patients regardless of duration of illness and in 83.3% of colitis patients who were symptomatic for at least 7 days (P < 0.001 compared to other study groups). Serum anti-LC3 IgG antibodies were detected in 56.3% of subjects with acute colitis, 100% of subjects with ALA or prolonged colitis, 45% of subjects with asymptomatic E. histolytica infection, 32.3% of subjects with E. dispar infection, and 23.4% of diarrhea controls. In comparison to ELISA for serum anti-LC3 IgG antibodies, the salivary lectin antigen assay is a more sensitive and specific test for acute amebic colitis. Detection of salivary anti-LC3 IgG antibodies by ELISA is an effective means for the diagnosis of ALA and prolonged cases of amebic colitis.     

Diagnostic methods for differentiation of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar in carriers: performance and clinical implications in a non-endemic setting

Unpreserved faecal samples, suspected to contain Entamoeba histolytica/Entamoeba dispar cysts or trophozoites on the basis of microscopic examination, and serum samples from 416 patients were collected in a prospective study to determine whether stool antigen assays and detection of antibodies in serum are reliable methods to distinguish between carriers of E. histolytica and E. dispar in comparison to the reference test: real-time PCR. In 283 patients (68%) DNA of E. histolytica or E. dispar was amplified by real-time PCR: 6 patients with amoebic colitis (2%), 19 carriers of E. histolytica (6.7%), and 258 carriers of E. dispar (91.2%). In 133 patients (31%) no DNA of E. histolytica or E. dispar could be amplified in the stool samples. This patient group was used as control for the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Using real-time PCR as a reference test, the sensitivity and specificity of (1) the Entamoeba test for the diagnosis of E. histolytica/E. dispar carrier were 59% and 98%, (2) E. histolytica II for the diagnosis of E. histolytica carrier was 71% and 100%, and (3) serology for the diagnosis of E. histolytica infection was 83.3% and 95.2%, respectively. Applied to carriers that did not originate from an endemic country the sensitivity of serology for E. histolytica infection was 90% and specificity was 98.8%. In comparison to real-time PCR the performances of Entamoeba test and E. histolytica II lacked sensitivity for a reliable diagnosis of E. histolytica/E. dispar infection in a non-endemic setting. In carriers of E. histolytica/E. dispar from non-endemic countries the high specificity of serology can be used to establish the diagnosis of E. histolytica infection if antibodies are present.     

Real-time PCR for detection and differentiation of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar in fecal samples

A closed-tube, real-time PCR assay was developed for sensitive and specific detection and differentiation of the two closely related intestinal protozoan parasites Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar directly from human feces. The assay is performed with the LightCycler system using fluorescence-labeled detection probes and primers amplifying a 310-bp fragment from the high-copy-number, ribosomal DNA-containing ameba episome. The assay was able to detect as little as 0.1 parasite per g of feces. The two pairs of primers used were specific for the respective ameba species, and results were not influenced by the presence of other Entamoeba species even when present in exceeding amounts. PCR was evaluated using several hundred stool samples from areas of amebiasis endemicity in Vietnam and South Africa, and results were compared with those of microscopy and ameba culture. PCR was found to be significantly more sensitive than microscopy or culture, as all samples positive by microscopy and 22 out of 25 (88%) samples positive by culture were also positive by PCR, but PCR revealed a considerable number of additional E. histolytica- or E. dispar-positive samples. Compared to culture and subsequent ameba differentiation by isoenzyme analysis, PCR was 100% specific for each of the two Entamoeba species. Interestingly, the comparison with PCR revealed that culture, in particular, underestimates E. histolytica infections. Given the high sensitivity and specificity of the developed PCR assay, the inability of microscopy to distinguish between the two ameba species, and the time it takes to culture and subsequently differentiate entamoebae by isoenzyme analysis, this assay is more suitable than microscopy or culture to correctly diagnose intestinal E. histolytica or E. dispar infection.     

Detection and differentiation of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar isolates in clinical samples by PCR and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

Differential diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica (pathogenic) and Entamoeba dispar (nonpathogenic), which are two morphologically identical species of amebae, is essential both for treatment decision and public health knowledge. The study reported here was designed to choose a reference differentiation technique. Stool samples (n = 95) were tested by microscopy, TechLab enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), and an in-house PCR. The target for the PCR amplification was a small region (135 bp) of the SSU rRNA selected to increase the sensitivity of the test. Sixty-eight specimens tested positive by PCR: 2 for E. histolytica and 66 for E. dispar. For detection of E. dispar, ELISA performance was lower than that of microscopy in this reference context, while PCR was much more sensitive than microscopy. Given the low proportion of E. histolytica cases, test performance for this species is difficult to assess. However, for differentiation, PCR performed well on simulated samples, while ELISA gave a discordant result for one of the two samples PCR positive for E. histolytica during the study. This report also confirms that E. dispar infection is significantly higher among travelers and underlines the possibility of acquiring E. histolytica infection in regions that are not areas of endemicity. Because of its lower sensitivity, the interest of ELISA for Entamoeba detection and differentiation in stools seems questionable in nontropical regions. On the other hand, results suggest that PCR should be useful as a reference test for sensitive differentiation of both species and to contribute to physicians' decision in treatment of E. histolytica- or E. dispar-infected patients.     

Comparison of use of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-based kits and PCR amplification of rRNA genes for simultaneous detection of Entamoeba histolytica and E. dispar.

A comparison of the use of three commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-based kits and PCR amplification of rRNA genes to detect and differentiate Entamoeba histolytica from E. dispar was carried out. Only the Techlab kit did not cross-react with E. dispar antigens, but it was 100 times less sensitive than PCR in detection of and differentiation between the two types of Entamoeba.     

Diagnosis of amebic liver abscess and intestinal infection with the TechLab Entamoeba histolytica II antigen detection and antibody tests

A noninvasive diagnostic test for amebic liver abscess is needed, because amebic and bacterial abscesses appear identical on ultrasound or computer tomography and because it is rarely possible to identify Entamoeba histolytica in stool specimens from patients with amebic liver abscess. Here we report a method of detection in serum of circulating E. histolytica Gal/GalNAc lectin to diagnose amebic liver abscess, which was used in patients from Dhaka, Bangladesh. The TechLab E. histolytica II test (which differentiates the true pathogen E. histolytica from Entamoeba dispar) detected Gal/GalNAc lectin in the sera of 22 of 23 (96%) amebic liver abscess patients tested prior to treatment with the antiamebic drug metronidazole and 0 of 70 (0%) controls. After 1 week of treatment with metronidazole, 9 of 11 (82%) patients became serum lectin antigen negative. The sensitivity of the E. histolytica II antigen detection test for intestinal infection was also evaluated. Antigen detection identified E. histolytica infection in 50 samples from 1, 164 asymptomatic preschool children aged 2 to 5 years, including 16 of 16 (100%) culture-positive specimens. PCR analysis of stool specimens was used to confirm that most antigen-positive but culture-negative specimens were true-positive: PCR identified parasite DNA in 27 of 34 (79%) of the antigen-positive, culture-negative stool specimens. Antigen detection was a more sensitive test for infection than antilectin antibodies, which were detected in only 76 of 98 (78%) amebic liver abscess patients and in 26 of 50 (52%) patients with intestinal infection. We conclude that the TechLab E. histolytica II kit is a sensitive means to diagnose hepatic and intestinal amebiasis prior to the institution of metronidazole treatment.     

Real-time-PCR assay for diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica infection

We developed a real-time-PCR assay utilizing a molecular-beacon probe for the detection of Entamoeba histolytica and compared its sensitivity to stool antigen detection and traditional PCR. A total of 205 stool and liver abscess pus specimens from patients and controls were used for this purpose, 101 (49%) of which were positive by the TechLab E. histolytica-specific antigen detection test, while the other 104 (51%) stool and liver abscess pus specimens were negative by the antigen detection test. DNA was extracted from the stool and liver abscess pus specimens by the QIAGEN method and the small-subunit rRNA gene of E. histolytica and then amplified by traditional and real-time PCR. Out of these 205 stool and liver abscess pus specimens, 124 were positive by the real-time-PCR assay and 90 were positive by the traditional-PCR test. Compared to the real-time-PCR assay, the antigen detection test was 79% sensitive and 96% specific. When the traditional-PCR test results were compared to the real-time-PCR assay, the sensitivity of traditional PCR was 72% and the specificity was 99%. In conclusion, all three methods for the detection of E. histolytica were highly specific, with real-time PCR being the most sensitive.     

Comparison of a stool antigen detection kit and PCR for diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar infections in asymptomatic cyst passers in Iran

The present study was conducted to compare stool antigen detection with PCR for the diagnosis of Entamoeba sp. infection in asymptomatic cyst passers from Iran. Entamoeba dispar and, in one case, E. moshkovskii were the Entamoeba spp. found in the amebic cyst passers. There was a 100% correlation between the results from the TechLab E. histolytica II stool antigen kit and those from nested PCR. We concluded that E. dispar is much more common in asymptomatic cyst passers in Iran and that antigen detection and PCR are comparable diagnostic modalities.     

Comparison of stool antigen detection kits to PCR for diagnosis of amebiasis

The present study was conducted to compare two stool antigen detection kits with PCR for the diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica infections by using fecal specimens submitted to the Department of Microbiology at St. Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, and the Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science, Adelaide, Australia. A total of 279 stool samples containing the E complex (E. histolytica, Entamoeba dispar, and Entamoeba moshkovskii) were included in this study. The stool specimens were tested by using two commercially produced enzyme immunoassays (the Entamoeba CELISA PATH and TechLab E. histolytica II kits) to detect antigens of E. histolytica. DNA was extracted from all of the samples with a Qiagen DNA stool mini kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany), and a PCR targeting the small-subunit ribosomal DNA was performed on all of the samples. When PCR was used as a reference standard, the CELISA PATH kit showed 28% sensitivity and 100% specificity. The TechLab ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) kit did not prove to be useful in detecting E. histolytica, as it failed to identify any of the E. histolytica samples which were positive by PCR. With the TechLab kit, cross-reactivity was observed for three specimens, one of which was positive for both E. dispar and E. moshkovskii while the other two samples contained E. moshkovskii. Quantitative assessment of the PCR and ELISA results obtained showed that the ELISA kits were 1,000 to 10,000 times less sensitive, and our results show that the CELISA PATH kit and the TechLab ELISA are not useful for the detection of E. histolytica in stool samples from patients in geographical regions where this parasite is not endemic.     

Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar: differentiation methods and implications

Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar are two species morphologically identical (except hematophagous trophozoites) but one of them is pathogenic. Sensitive and specific molecular techniques which are able to distinguish E. histolytica from E. dispar have been developed recently. Detection of antigen in stool using the ELISA method is the diagnostic test method of choice for clinical use in the developing world. It is rapid and simple. Cultures for zymodeme analysis and PCR detection of the parasite remain research tools. Species identification is imperative both for improved clinical diagnosis and treatment and for planning control strategies.     

Laboratory diagnostic techniques for Entamoeba species

The genus Entamoeba contains many species, six of which (Entamoeba histolytica, Entamoeba dispar, Entamoeba moshkovskii, Entamoeba polecki, Entamoeba coli, and Entamoeba hartmanni) reside in the human intestinal lumen. Entamoeba histolytica is the causative agent of amebiasis and is considered a leading parasitic cause of death worldwide in humans. Although recent studies highlight the recovery of E. dispar and E. moshkovskii from patients with gastrointestinal symptoms, there is still no convincing evidence of a causal link between the presence of these two species and the symptoms of the host. New approaches to the identification of E. histolytica are based on detection of E. histolytica-specific antigen and DNA in stool and other clinical samples. Several molecular diagnostic tests, including conventional and real-time PCR, have been developed for the detection and differentiation of E. histolytica, E. dispar, and E. moshkovskii in clinical samples. The purpose of this review is to discuss different methods that exist for the identification of E. histolytica, E. dispar, and E. moshkovskii which are available to the clinical diagnostic laboratory. To address the need for a specific diagnostic test for amebiasis, a substantial amount of work has been carried out over the last decade in different parts of the world. The molecular diagnostic tests are increasingly being used for both clinical and research purposes. In order to minimize undue treatment of individuals infected with other species of Entamoeba such as E. dispar and E. moshkovskii, efforts have been made for specific diagnosis of E. histolytica infection and not to treat based simply on the microscopic examination of Entamoeba species in the stool. The incorporation of many new technologies into the diagnostic laboratory will lead to a better understanding of the public health problem and measures to control the disease.     

Clinical usefulness of components of the Triage immunoassay,enzyme immunoassay for toxins A and B,and cytotoxin B tissue culture assay for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile diarrhea

We studied 557 nonduplicate fresh stool specimens from adult patients clinically suspected of having Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. All samples were tested in parallel with an in-house cytotoxin B tissue culture assay (CTA), the C DIFFICILE TOX A/B II test (TA/B; TechLab, Blacksburg, VA), and the Triage Micro C DIFFICILE Panel (Biosite Diagnostics, San Diego, CA). The Triage device detects toxin A (TA) and glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) simultaneously. Of the specimens, 350 were negative and 95 were positive for all markers. Another 112 specimens yielded discrepant results. The CTA found 143 positive specimens. Results of the components of the Triage and TA/B were compared separately with those of CTA. GDH was the most sensitive but least specific marker, whereas TA and TA/B were less sensitive but highly specific. Because of these attributes and a quick turnaround time, GDH would be the best screening test for C difficile-associated diarrhea. CTA detected the highest number of cases of C difficile-associated diarrhea and would be most useful as a confirmatory test for GDH-positive and TA-negative specimens.     

Intestinal antilectin immunoglobulin A antibody response and immunity to Entamoeba dispar infection following cure of amebic liver abscess

We followed 93 subjects with amebic liver abscess (ALA) and 963 close associate controls at 3-month intervals for 36 months to characterize intestinal and humoral antibody responses to the amebic galactose-inhibitable lectin and to determine whether immunity developed to Entamoeba histolytica or Entamoeba dispar infection following cure of ALA. We found that ALA subjects had a higher prevalence and level of intestinal antilectin immunoglobulin A (IgA) and serum anti-LC3 (cysteine-rich recombinant lectin protein) IgA and IgG antibodies, P < 0.01 and P < 0.05, respectively, compared to controls. The intestinal antilectin IgA antibody response was sustained over a longer time period in ALA subjects (71.8% remained positive at 18 months and 52.6% at 36 months, P < 0.001 compared to 17.6% and 10.3% of controls, respectively). ALA subjects were highly immune to E. dispar infection throughout the study (0% infected at 6 and 36 months, compared to 6.5% and 4.9% of control subjects, respectively, P < 0.05). Upon entry into the study, 6.3% of ALA subjects were infected with E. histolytica; the incidence of new E. histolytica infections in controls (as determined by culture) was too low (1.4%) to determine whether ALA subjects exhibited immunity to new infections. We found that stool cultures every 3 months markedly underestimated the occurrence of new E. histolytica infections, as 15.3% of controls seroconverted after 12 months of follow-up. Unfortunately, under the field conditions present in Durban, South Africa, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for detection of lectin antigen in stool yielded unreliable results. In summary, subjects cured of ALA exhibited sustained mucosal IgA antibody responses to the amebic galactose-inhibitable lectin and a high level of immunity to E. dispar infection. Determination of immunity to E. histolytica following cure of ALA will require the use of more sensitive and reliable diagnostic methods.     

Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in urine samples by nucleic acid tests: comparison with culture and enzyme immunoassay of genital swab specimens.

Two commercially available nucleic acid-based tests, ligase chain reaction (LCR; Abbott Laboratories) and PCR (Roche Diagnostics), for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in male and female urine samples were compared with culture and enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (Microtrak; Syva) for C. trachomatis detection in genital samples. The samples were collected from 1,005 patients who attended a sexually transmitted disease clinic. In this study population, the prevalence of the infection was 4%. Specimens which were reactive in any of the tests were retested with a different PCR test using primers directed against the major outer membrane protein gene. With a "gold standard" of a positive culture, or any other positive test result if it was confirmed by an independent test, the Roche PCR (95% sensitive, 99.9% specific) was more sensitive than the LCR (75% sensitive, 100% specific) (chi2, P < 0.0001) while both tests were more sensitive than culture (58% sensitive, 100% specific) or EIA (45% sensitive, 100% specific) (chi2, P < 0.001). The Roche PCR and Abbott LCR tests of urine identified 65% and 30% more positive patients, respectively, than did testing by culture of urethral or cervical specimens. Nucleic acid testing of urine specimens for C. trachomatis is a more sensitive and convenient method for the detection of genital infection.     

Evaluation of an immunochromatographic dip strip test for simultaneous detection of Cryptosporidium spp, Giardia duodenalis, and Entamoeba histolytica antigens in human faecal samples

Immunochromatographic (IC) tests may play an important role in the future diagnosis of parasitic diseases because of their speed and simplicity of use. A recently developed test to detect Cryptosporidium spp, Giardia duodenalis and Entamoeba histolytica was evaluated. Microscopy and PCR were the "gold standard" reference techniques and the results of this IC test were compared with those obtained with ELISA and IC single test for the three parasites. One hundred sixty stool samples were assayed. Using microscopy, 22 samples were diagnosed as positive for Cryptosporidium spp., 31 for Giardia duodenalis, 41 for Entamoeba histolytica/dispar, and 68 had a negative diagnosis for the three parasites. Results of IC tests show sensitivities of 70-72% for Cryptosporidium, 90-97% for Giardia and 62.5% for Entamoeba histolytica. Specificities were of 93.6-94.9%, >99% and 96.1%, respectively. In all diagnoses, agreement with microscopy and PCR was over 90%, except in the triple test and microscopy in E. histolytica detection that was 76.3%, due to the inability of microscopy to differentiate E. histolytica from nonpathogenic species such as E. dispar or E. moshkovskii. The triple stool immunoassays provide adequate sensitivities and specificities for use in outbreak situations, for screening proposals and for massive assays in endemic areas where a large number of samples must be analysed or as complementary test for individual diagnosis.     

Comparison of real-time PCR for detection of the tcdC gene with four toxin immunoassays and culture in diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection

We have developed a rapid real-time PCR method using fluorescence resonance energy transfer probes and the LightCycler (Roche Diagnostics), which will detect the presence of the tcdC gene of Clostridium difficile in stool samples. Our PCR method also will identify the presence of base pair deletions, one of which (18 bp) has been associated with the "epidemic" toxin-hyperproducing strains. We compared the results of this PCR with those of three C. difficile toxin-detecting enzyme immunoassays (EIAs), an EIA for the detection of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH), and culture of C. difficile. A total of 200 stool specimens were studied by the methods under comparison. C. difficile was isolated from 49 specimens by culture, and 44 of these were confirmed as containing one of the genes associated with toxin production ("toxigenic culture"). Using toxigenic culture as the "gold standard", the sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative predictive values, respectively, of the assays were 48%, 98%, 88%, and 87% for the Premier toxin A and B test; 48%, 99%, 91%, and 87% for the ImmunoCard toxin A & B test; 48%, 84%, 46%, and 85% for the Xpect C. difficile toxin A/B test; 32%, 100%, 100%, and 84% for the Triage C. difficile panel (for toxin A); and 86%, 97%, 90%, and 96% for the LightCycler PCR. Thus, in comparison to the sensitivity of toxigenic culture, the sensitivities of the toxin immunoassays were unacceptably low, while the LightCycler real-time PCR assay for the detection of the tcdC gene of C. difficile is sensitive and specific.     

Epidemiologic and molecular study of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar strains in pacients with diarrhea in Cumana, Sucre state, Venezuela

An epidemiological and molecular study on E. histolytica and E. dispar was carried out in 428 patients with gastrointestinal symptomatology of diarrhea from different health centers in Cumana, Sucre state. The samples were processed through: direct examination with 0.85% physiological saline solution, temporal lugol staining, trichromic staining and the Ritchie method of concentration; a sucrose gradient was used for cyst isolation. The small subunit of the 16S RNA was amplified by nested, multiplex PCR for the molecular detection. The E. histolytica/E. dispar prevalences according to the direct, Ritchie and trichromic staining methods were 20.09, 13.79 and 12.15%, respectively; while prevalences according to PCR for E. histolytica and E. dispar were 6.31% and 4.44%, respectively, also detecting four cases of mixed infection. Sequencing of the amplified fragments of E. histolytica showed 100% homology with the sequences with strains from Merida (Venezuela), USA, Brazil, Mexico and GenBank. The infections by E. histolytica and E. dispar were statistically associated with age but not with sex. The presence of mucus, blood and abdominal pain were only associated to E. histolytica infection. The moderate prevalence of E. histolytica shows the endemic status of this population and warns about the potential problem as a morbidity and mortality in Sucre state. The frequency of E. dispar in this population suggests the existence of an overestimation problem in the diagnosis of amoebiasis with its clinical and epidemiological implications, and shows the poor knowledge about the true prevalences of this protozoan. The PCR allowed for the differential identification of E. histolytica and E. dispar, as well as the presence of mixed infections, making a great tool for epidemiological amoebiasis studies.